[Saeko]

Every landlord in America forces you to live with a large, violent dog that could easily kill you. Obviously, this is a fucked up societal level issue. Which of the following solutions do you prefer?

1. Demand the removal of the dogs.
2. Demand the dogs be trained not to kill.
3. Work really hard to get the dogs approval.

I think #3 is a pretty good idea.

None of the above. Kill the landlord.

[Godstud]

@Hindsite Do you have anything to say about Saeko's last video post and your freedom of religion being stifled by the police state?

Do you think people singing Christian hymns are threatening to the police or is it just oppression?

Are you outraged, yet, or do you think this is just a law and order thing?

[SpecialOlympian]

?

I work in an industry where generational wealth produces the clients I work with. I can not stress how the systemic destruction of black wealth in America has been an invisible (to some people) but powerfully destructive force for black communities.

Being redlined and having your home's value reduced, the largest source of wealth for the average family, destroyed the ability of black Americans to engage and particpate within society. And that's before you even get to the fact that after redlining blacks were just straight up not permitted to buy valuable real estate in white communities.

And this was all after we literally dropped firebombs from planes on the early 20th century version of what may have become the black banking sector.

Imagine if your grandfather had inherited enough money in his late teens or early 20's to buy a decent used car. It would have allowed him to move further, to apply for better jobs. It would have had lasting and large effects on his children and grandchildren, and where they would be today.

At best America has ignored the systematic destruction of black wealth and at worst it has approved it. This has never been addressed.

If we can print $5 trillion to create "liquidity" by buying bad investments from the rich so that they will put that money back into the stock market, but better this time, we can give every black American the monetary equivalent of 40 acres and a mule. And it will be a better investment into our economy because it will be giving money to consumers who drive the market.

[ness31]

I can’t get the bandana dude clip to work.

I can’t see any police throwing the tear gas, but maybe I’m not looking hard enough

And good post SO. You are describing systemic racism. Something someone as intelligent as Tucker Carlson can’t seem to be able to acknowledge.

[colliric]

I can’t get the bandana dude clip to work.

It's about the Tulsa Race massacre.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulsa_race_massacre

Thank God for Wikipedia (and Wikileaks).... You can finally read about this shit.

Good on @noemon for posting it.

Here's vox's own 10 minute summary:

[Rich]

The moral arc that was providentially described by Dr. King bends toward it.

Would that be the moral arc, that sex should only take place within heterosexual marriage. Of course that sanctimonious hypocrite didn't keep that. You might thing that Liberals would have had a problem not only with King lying and cheating on his wife (a terrible crime when Trump does it) but also the power imbalance of his relations.

[Julian658]

@Julian658 Asians? So do you mean people think this way about East Indians, or Filipinos? Really? No. It's based on physical appearance and little else. If they don't LOOK Chinese, the stereotype won't apply.

Asians?


Stereotyping is a form of racism.

Edit: Regarding what you just posted. This is going to happen a lot more as the people start getting angrier and angrier at police abuses. I do not condone this. I condone fighting back against police using violence.

Stereotyping is racism, you got that right.
That is the point!
Blacks are associated with negative stereotypes in America.
Asian Americans (mostly Chinese and Koreans) are associated with a positive stereotype. Quite often stereotpes have a basis on reality. IN America the Chinese and Koreans score the highest in aptitude tests such as the ASAT


People in America feel blacks do more violent crime, that is a negative stereotype that is somewhat backed by crime statistics. Yes, ths is racism.

You have two options: Change the thoughts of people or change the basis for the stereotype.

[Godstud]

Do you forget the negative stereotype about Asians being bad drivers?

You see, the positive stereotypes don't negate the negative ones. We don't NEED stereotypes. Period.

[Tainari88]

I have heard every type of dumb stereotype known to humanity.

All of them have a grain of truth. But largely are false about individuals.

The grain of truth is exaggerated.

People need to internally change their attitudes towards people they often don't even know well at all and rarely socialize with, rarely speak a common language with, and rarely know.

I like some people and dislike others? why? Because individuals vary. I can love or fall in love with a man from my own culture or totally outside of it. All of it depends on the individual involved.

I even know men in here with totally different politics than my own who I find extremely easy to love and they are not from my ethnic group. All because I like their personalities.

[Julian658]

Do you forget the negative stereotype about Asians being bad drivers?

You see, the positive stereotypes don't negate the negative ones. We don't NEED stereotypes. Period.

I did not say stereotypes are good or bad. I simply gave you examples of negative and positive stereotypes. Mentioning that stereotypes do exist does not mean I am endorsing stereotypes. Sadly as someone else said; stereotypes have some basis on group behavior. However, they do not necessarily represent the individual. That is why racism is easily eradicated if we evaluate people individually and not according to the group they belong to. That is why Identity politics is so evil.

[ness31]

I like stereotypes. Even if there wasn’t a word for it, we’d still do it. You realize most comedy is based on stereotypical humour? Fuck yeah, let’s burn down the mother fucking house

[Pants-of-dog]

You said there's no evidence that Floyd knowingly used counterfeit money, which is true. There's also no evidence that the 9-11 call about Floyd by the store owner, Floyd's arrest, or the police brutality and murder of Floyd was based on racial bias, which is true.

While my statement (that there is no evidence to suggest that Mr. Floyd knowingly carried counterfeit money) is true, I am not sure about the rest.

The store owner never called the cops. And since we know the store had a policy to call about counterfeit money, we can assume that the teenager who called was not being racist, or that it would not have mattered anyway.

But when we look at how whites are treated for using counterfeit money, we see a clear and significant discrepancy between that and how Mr. Floyd was treated. That, in conjuction with the longstanding tradition of racism against blacks in the US, supports the idea that racial bias was a strong component of everything that happened to Mr. Floyd after the cops were called.

That doesn't mean it wasn't a clear case of police brutality and murder.

But that won't stop nutters from calling it racism for pointing out FACTS. Because virtue signalling and being triggered is about emotions, not facts. Some people think facts are racist. When facts become offensive and taboo where you can't even say it, civil discourse erodes. That includes our media, education systems etc and then extends to how everyone behaves. Because then acting on facts that people think are offensive & racist becomes taboo, and our politics & society erodes because decisions are made based on feelings and not facts.

Am I supposed to address this emotional and off topic rant?

[skinster]

[Drlee]

@colliric I think blaming Trump is like blaming the CEO for what his asshole workers are doing right at the very bottom of the corporate structure and letting those assholes get away with it. I'm not defending his decisions in this situation so far though. And maybe I am having second thoughts, but I wanted Sanders-Gabbard and you all know it. If Biden goes with Gabbard as VP, I might rethink not supporting him.

Here is the rub. In our system there are only two options and both of them are affirmative. You can vote for Trump or vote for Biden. No other choice has any affect at all UNLESS you voted for Trump or Voted for Hillary. The cop-out writing in Colon Powell or staying at home because you did not get your dream ticket at best does not matter. Nobody is learning a lesson from it.

In fact. I have a friend who, during the last election cycle, did not vote because he did not like Hillary. He said that was making a statement because he was a democrat. So I pointed out what the news was saying about people like him. The news called voters like him "a failure of the get out the vote campaign". He meant to protest the candidate. What he actually promoted was more people giving people rides to the polls and the like.

The Trump campaign this time is absolutely counting on voter suppression. They plan to use it in obvious and draconian ways. They have said they are going to do it and are already in court doing it. If someone chooses not to vote for Biden because of his vice presidential candidate they are accomplishing Trump's goal.

The Democrats, in my opinion, need to make a run straight at white voters. They need to try to accomplish two things. They need to peel off white woman voters from Trump with ads aimed right at them. And they need to establish early on that there are two kinds of voters that they are appealing to. Those who like Biden and those who are voting against Trump. It is the later that Trump fears the most. By far.

In all likelihood these demonstrations will be a distant memory come November. (More is the pity.) The democratic strategy must be to kick demonstrations, particularly woman's marches, off again in October. They must be big, organized and hopefully (bit not critically) peaceful.

Come November there will have been another 100,000 American deaths from the virus. At least. The democrats need to lay this blame directly on the lack of response from the Trump administration; early on and in rushing reopening. Why? Because it is the truth and it resonates with women.

[Finfinder]

Come November there will have been another 100,000 American deaths from the virus. At least. The democrats need to lay this blame directly on the lack of response from the Trump administration; early on and in rushing reopening. Why? Because it is the truth and it resonates with women.

That is friggin hilarious. They should hold up signs when they are rioting and pretesting "Trump won't wear a mask". I wonder what a social distant mob looks like?

I heard there is a run on masks now not do to the virus but flash mobs. Antifa thanks god for the My Pillow guy.

Good luck with laying blame ......the leftist feigned outrage is exposed.

[Pants-of-dog]

Indeed, it is a possibility as well. But I doubt they'd be able to put this under the rug given what's happened.

And I've shown that your reasoning is highly questionable and based on a rather particular interpretation of the medical examiner's report. Indeed, the AG of Minnesota decided to uphold the other charges as far as I'm aware - so they are trying to cover their asses in case intent becomes hard to establish.

The fact that the DA and the medical examiner’s office are not getting punished at all is yet another way in which the government has failed, has tried to keep itself from being accountable to the people, and is one of the ways in which the entire justice system is fundamentally broken.

Indeed, at least that's what happened in this case. And in that case measures will need to be taken.

The obvious next step is to outlaw this hold completely in all circumstances. The police obviously cannot be trusted to use it safely.

And also the same public that elected Obama twice. It's almost as if voters' attitudes on race are not stable over time but depend on other variables rather than the Swiss-knife explanation of systemic racism.

Interestingly, you skipped him.

Obama’s election does not change or contradict the fact that a large percentage of the US voting population are racist, or stupid, or both, or the fact that many US politicians use this racism for their benefit.

Of course, and that makes it hard to differentiate between both. Perhaps a more productive way to approach this would be to use a more granular dataset.

Maybe, but they didn't account for the trends. That complicates things. By the way, accounting such trends might as well find a stronger effect of those contextual socioeconomic/racial effects - who knows?

I would disagree - there might of course be case heterogeneity that isn't being caught by state or district level effects. Of course, you might also question Fryer's data too - he basically hired an army of qualified semi-slave labor research assistants to transcribe each of the reports there, which may of course have transcription errors - but I would strongly advice against relying too much on aggregate data.

Unless you have some sort of support for your speculations about this study, I am going to dismiss this as mere speculation.

The evidence shows that systemic racism and police killings and brutality are linked, which makes sense given US history.

So you think the repression of peaceful demonstrators is legal? Maybe. Again, I suspect it depends a lot on the situation.

What? That is a weird strawman.

No one is claiming that the brutality is legal. What I am saying is that your solutions to police brutality are incredibly unrealistic because they depend on finding evidence that high level cops are deliberately telling their underlings (in writing) to do these acts.

There is a distressing lack of accountability, which should be a red flag for anyone who likes democracy. Yet another reason to defund, disarm or abolish police forces.

I don't know, maybe because there's a pattern of increasingly lethal arms in hands of civilians (both law abiding and those who engage in crime).

Yes, that is your claim, and then I asked for evidence to support this claim.

Please provide said evidence.

I wonder why? Maybe because those armed protesters didn't have people among them predisposed to attack the police? Unfortunately, those guys do show up to the protests over the homicide of George Floyd and use peaceful protesters as cover to do precisely that.

This is surreal.

In all the many, many, many, many videos showing police brutality that are coming out right now, not a single one shows cops “accidentally” beating someone because they were in the way when the cops were going after looters and people attacking cops.

This is a complete fabrication, and a troubling excuse for wanton police brutality.

Ok?

If you only care about upper middle class college kids, sure. But how about showing what happens in the neighborhoods where the have nots live? How about showing the shootouts between looters and people defending their own businesses and communities? Why is it that the far left doesn't care about their security?

Once you do that, the conclusion doesn't seem that obvious to me. Unless of course you want the poorer neighborhoods of American cities to become the Wild West or favelas, that is. If so, I invite you to live inside or close to them before commenting. Even better, ask communities themselves if the police should be removed from their neighborhoods and what would happen if it were.

And how the hell is that a liberal like me is making this sort of class based argument to a self-declared Marxist? Like, what the hell?

This is a strawman.

In one neighbourhood where the have nots live, a police officer was called to check on a local who had not committed a crime or done anything violent. That man, Mr. Floyd, was killed by that cop.

Again, the main cause of violence in have not neighbourhoods is the cops, If you think the cops are protecting the people and businesses of have not communities, you are wrong.

This idea that cops protect and serve lower class communities is incorrect, and to use it to justify police presence in these communities is oxymoronic.

No, the argument is that they have no other lawful means to recover the lost products. Again, what do you suggest the clerks do?

Again, (and I have repeated this at least seven times now) Mr. Floyd did not break any laws. He did not leave with the goods.

And what I think the clerks should do is what the store owner now wants them to do: not call the cops.

However, the lack of an appropriate response to what is a natural reaction to rather brutal footage arising from the activities of police unions and the like (which I agree are part of the problem) becomes harder to tolerate as the video evidence piles up. Or to be clearer: If this incident hadn't been filmed, the reaction to it would have been a lot more muted.

So bodycams show why it is important to deal with systemic racism, but do not help deal with systemic racism.

Refusing to return the merchandise is not legal, even if his state of mind didn't allow for him to reflect on what he was doing. Drunkenness or being high is rarely an excuse for violating the law.

I an not sure that sitting outside a store with the merchandise (while waiting for police to determine if there was a crime) actually counts as committing a crime.

That seems like a rigid and dogmatic interpretation of the law that serves only to justify police treating Mr. Floyd like a criminal.

[Julian658]

While my statement (that there is no evidence to suggest that Mr. Floyd knowingly carried counterfeit money) is true, I am not sure about the rest.

The store owner never called the cops. And since we know the store had a policy to call about counterfeit money, we can assume that the teenager who called was not being racist, or that it would not have mattered anyway.

But when we look at how whites are treated for using counterfeit money, we see a clear and significant discrepancy between that and how Mr. Floyd was treated. That, in conjuction with the longstanding tradition of racism against blacks in the US, supports the idea that racial bias was a strong component of everything that happened to Mr. Floyd after the cops were called.



Am I supposed to address this emotional and off topic rant?

POD:

Initially there were two cops who noted Mr. Floyd was drugged and about to drive off. There is video of Mr. Floyd when he was removed from his car. He was very wobbly and unsteady and immediately sat down on the side walk. When the cops tried to put Floyd in the back seat of the squad car he said he was claustrophobic and that he could not breath. It seems he was already short of breath before the knee to his neck. The cops should have called an ambulance instead of killing him. By the way there is a syndrome of drugged prisoners dying suddenly while undergoing arrest.

Excited Delirium
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3088378/

Excited delirium (EXD), first described in the mid 1800’s, has been referred to by many other names – Bell’s mania, lethal catatonia, acute exhaustive mania and agitated delirium.1 Regardless of the label used, all accounts describe almost the exact same sequence of events: delirium with agitation (fear, panic, shouting, violence and hyperactivity), sudden cessation of struggle, respiratory arrest and death.2 In the majority of cases unexpected strength and signs of hyperthermia are described as well.3,4. While the incidence of EXD is not known, the purpose of this review is to identify what is known or suspected about the pathophysiology, outcomes and management options associated with EXD to assist medical professionals in the future.

I believe the cop precipitated the death of Mr. Floyd who was already not doing well due to drug intoxication. Floyd had POT, Fentanyl, and Meth in his system. I am not excusing the murder by the cops, but it is important to look at all angles besides the obvious racism.

[colliric]

Lol, Pat Robertson has disendorsed Donald Trump over his response to the George Floyd Protests.



"You just don't do that Mr President, It isn't cool!"

Have a good laugh guys.

[Pants-of-dog]

@Julian658

Do you have a point?

[Unthinking Majority]

But when we look at how whites are treated for using counterfeit money, we see a clear and significant discrepancy between that and how Mr. Floyd was treated. That, in conjuction with the longstanding tradition of racism against blacks in the US, supports the idea that racial bias was a strong component of everything that happened to Mr. Floyd after the cops were called.

But you have zero evidence to support that claim. You're stereotyping and over-generalizing cops. You're saying that some white cops are racist against black people and commit racially motivated brutality against them, therefore this cop was racist against George Floyd. You're making the same leaps in logic that racist white cops make towards black people. They think "because black men commit many more crimes per capita than white people, all black men should be treated as suspected criminals".

The fact is not all police brutality is racially motivated. There's tons of examples of white cops brutalizing white people, including during the last week vs protestors. Floyd's abuse could have been racially motivated, but could also not have been. There's no evidence of it, and so it wouldn't fly in court.

You're the one being emotional. You're making all sorts of negative assumptions against these cops without evidence, while giving Floyd the benefit of the doubt, because he's black and because he was victimized by police. Those are double-standards.